[Magdalen] Drug research.

[Allan Carr]

> On Aug 26, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Allan Carr <allanc25 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> My mother had paranoid schizophrenia and was treated with shock treatments, before thorazine was available. She hated those treatments and I think they made her worse. Since she was in a mental asylum, indigent, and not a US citizen, she was deported back to her home country where she died of cancer a few years later. I was sixteen when she was deported and living with an uncle. I never saw her again.
> I wish she had been born a few years later when thorazine was available. I wanted to give the group more information about thorazine, not nitpick you. You really need to get over yourself.
> 
> 
>> On Aug 24, 2016, at 11:02 PM, James Oppenheimer-Crawford <oppenheimerjw at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Thank you, Ann, for bring the matter up.  Perhaps it would be good to say a
>> bit more.
>> 
>> Disagreement is not the issue at all.  It's that the original post might
>> have something questionable in it, and this is brought up by someone else.
>> 
>> A sharpshooter is one who finds some mistake in the text of another and
>> instead of pointing it out the person involved, blats it to the entire
>> list. You can almost sense the glee in their text. Of course, if
>> confronted, they just say, "I was only pointing out the facts."  I have to
>> say I am very seldom the target of these, because, having been attacked a
>> number of times, I know I have to have my facts straight. And I certainly
>> did recently, the claims of someone, based on the sterling research source
>> of Wikipedia notwithstanding. But I see it happen to others on this list
>> all the time, and it is almost never helpful. (Ahem -- in my opinion
>> anyway, it seems like it just derails the discussion for little purpose)
>> 
>> It happens all the time: someone makes some point in a post, and then
>> someone else posts to the entire list that the person had some factual
>> mistake in their post.  This needless interference distracts from what the
>> other person was trying to say, and of course it lessens the likelihood
>> that that other person will speak up in the future.  Let's face it. We all
>> enjoy that rush of having the real facts.  When we can say, "Whoa! You got
>> it a bit wrong there, but I on the other hand, have the actual truth. Hey,
>> here are the URLs to prove it!" And in many cases, the matter is virtually
>> irrelevant to the discussion matter, but is a major distractor to
>> discussion.
>> 
>> Certainly there are cases where the information might be potentially
>> harmful if not remedied immediately, and one might wish to bring that up
>> publicly, but that's usually not the case here.  And of course, there's the
>> matter of the person who sees something they know (or think they "know") is
>> not right, but does not wish to take the time to send a private email. If
>> they do that, there is a classy way to do it, and a not so classy way to do
>> it.
>> 
>> I've been guilty of that, and I'm sorry I have. I would like to think I
>> know a little better.  I have been really trying to be a better poster, and
>> to a large extent, I think I've improved. I try to make comments off list.
>> It doesn't take that long and it's unnecessary to air our dirty laundry in
>> public -- unless our main desire IS attacking the other person, of course.
>> In some cases, I think the people involved are in a lot of pain and are not
>> having a very good life, and they feel a lot of rage, and sometimes it just
>> gets spilled out in an attack email. We are all actually doing what we can.
>> Every one of us is fighting some kind of battle.
>> 
>> I don't mean to condemn folks who choose a different way of making
>> corrections, but I do wish they would think a bit more about the pall it
>> puts on the entire list whenever that happens.  For everyone who knows the
>> sender, there are a number of lurkers who are saying, "Good Lord! I will
>> NEVER  post to this list!" We know how many folks just read but never post.
>> I submit that there's a reason for that.
>> 
>> The listowners can confirm or deny that our numbers grow smaller year by
>> year.
>> 
>> James W. Oppenheimer-Crawford
>> *“A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved,
>> except in memory. LLAP**”  -- *Leonard Nimoy
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:28 PM, Ann Markle <ann.markle at aya.yale.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Jim, I'm not sure what you mean by "sharpshooter."  Does this mean anyone
>>> who dares disagree with you?  I realize you've worked in mental health.  I
>>> also realize you cite one anecdotal incident, which doesn't mean Thorazine
>>> for pregnancy was common medical practice.  We also don't know what other
>>> kinds of symptoms this RN you knew was exhibiting, many of which might have
>>> indicated prescription of an antipsychotic med.  Margaret, who has worked
>>> in medicine/academia for her career, might have something informed to say
>>> about the origins of Thorazine, as well.  My impression is that this was a
>>> factual discussion, not "sharpshooting," whatever that is.  Sorry you
>>> experienced it as some kind of assault, but just sayin', it didn't look
>>> like that to a disinterested observer who likes you both a lot.
>>> 
>>> Ann
>>> 
>>> The Rev. Ann Markle
>>> Buffalo, NY
>>> ann.markle at aya.yale.edu
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:30 PM, James Oppenheimer-Crawford <
>>> oppenheimerjw at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I saw that. It's aimed at the psychiatric angle, so it doesn't talk about
>>>> the other stuff.
>>>> 
>>>> The point was that many medicines started out in a very different
>>> category
>>>> than that in which they became well known.
>>>> 
>>>> I am really tired of sharpshooters. Not surprised, but tired.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> James W. Oppenheimer-Crawford
>>>> *“A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved,
>>>> except in memory. LLAP**”  -- *Leonard Nimoy
>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Allan Carr <allanc25 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorpromazine
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the section headed "History", it was developed as a better
>>> alternative
>>>>> to a drug used to calm surgical patients. It was quickly tested in a
>>>> mental
>>>>> hospital, with a dramatic effect on a manic patient who was discharged
>>> in
>>>>> three weeks.
>>>>> It was marketed as Thorazine, replaced such treatments as shock therapy
>>>>> and psychosurgery and quickly emptied mental hospitals of patients with
>>>> all
>>>>> sorts of psychoses.
>>>>> It also led to the discovery of antidepressants.
>>>>> If I recall correctly, there are 30,000 homeless living on the streets
>>> of
>>>>> Los Angeles, many of them psychotic. I'm not sure if most of them
>>> reject
>>>>> treatment with drugs like Thorazine.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 17, 2016, at 2:25 PM, ME Michaud <michaudme at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thorazine was the first anti-psychotic (early 1950s)
>>>>>> but IIRC was developed with the hope that it would treat malaria.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In its rudimentary clinical trials it was found to have other
>>>> potentials.
>>>>>> -M, who remembers patients with Tardive dyskinesia
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 17, 2016, James Oppenheimer-Crawford <
>>>>>> oppenheimerjw at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> No.
>>>